Posts Tagged ‘Katy Tang’

Appointed Supervisor Katy Tang Goes Off on Twitter over “Supervisor slams brakes on L-Taraval changes”

Friday, May 6th, 2016

Here you go:

Supervisor slams brakes on L-Taraval changes By Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez

Und:

Parking Over Pedestrians: Tang Shuts Down L-Taraval Safety Plan BY JACK MORSE

And then came the blowback. First, from the long-time, SFG0v-connected, right-of-center SPUR:

Capturekjh copy

So what does that mean? The hed’s sensationalistic – well why’s that? I don’t get it, man. Katy Tang’s certainly not jamming the pedal to the metal, right?

And what “betrays the truth?” Hey, you know what the phrase could mean IRL? It could mean that somebody’s unintentionally revealing something, like, hey man I didn’t steal a _red_ car and then park it in a barn down near the big cafe in La Honda. Anyway, that’s what that phrase could mean.

And hey, here comes the appointed Supervisor herself:

4shame copy

“Shameful?” WOW.

Also, “news” in quotes? OUCH. The ‘Xam isn’t news?

And here’s your stinger:

Twittrr copy

Oh, so all this is Twitter’s fault? I think that’s what I’m hearing.

Of course, our local transit activists won’t ever be happy, but I don’t see what’s wrong with the SFMTA changing Taraval. If I were Traffic Czar, I’d put in a mess of traffic lights west of 19th, to like 25th or so, but that’s just me. And if I were Traffic Czar, I wouldn’t care what local small business owners think – that’s what would make me a czar, the lack of pressure from the Taraval Historic District Business Owners Association, or whatever these people might call themselves.

Anyway, this is what you get with appointed Supervisors, IMO.

If District Two Supervisor Mark Farrell Needs To Be Replaced Soon, Two People with Legitimacy are Abe Simmons and Kat Anderson

Monday, December 15th, 2014

First things first, you tell me how big a deal this is:

Supervisor Farrell directed to pay S.F. $190,000 for violation by John Coté

And don’t niss this part:

“Theoretically speaking, I think they then become the same campaign,” said John St. Croix, director of the Ethics Commission.

Kaboom. Did an effort (from Janet Reilly, or some other Reilly)…

FPPC Stipulation, Decision and Order

…lead to this…

FPPC Letter to Charles H. Bell, Jr.

…almost four long years later?

OBSERVATIONS / QUESTIONS:

1. Why does big news always seem to come out post meridiem on a Day of Frigg, you know, like on a Friday evening? Funny that.

2. Could this situation explain why Mark Farrell nominated (law student(!)) Katy Tang as interim Board of Supervisors President?

3. Is Mark Farrell going to serve out his second term? IDK.

4. If he doesn’t, who’s going to replace him? Mmmm…

The election that District 2 held four years ago was narrowly lost by Janet Reilly, but I can’t see her ever getting appointed D2 Supe in today’s political environment.

Now, what about the people who came in third and fourth, the people who myabe could have / should have formed an ANYBODY BUT JANET ranked-choice voting troika / three-way with Mark Farrell?

Meet Ivy Leaguer Abraham Simmons:

Does he still live in the District? IDK.

Now meet Stanfoo-educated Kat Anderson:

I’m thinking either of these two attorneys could slot right into the job.

You know, if necessary.

Here’s what people have been talking about over the weekend:

Agenda – December 16, 2014

SAN FRANCISCO ETHICS COMMISSION
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING and AGENDA
December 16, 2014, 5:00 P.M.
Room 400 City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco

[EXCERPT]

  • Discussion with City Attorney’s Office regarding potential litigation by the City Attorney’s Office against local committees, including Common Sense Voters, SF 2010; Vote for Mark Farrell for District 2 Supervisor, for violations of local campaign finance laws.  Possible Closed Session.  (Attachments: FPPC Stipulation, Decision and OrderFPPC Letter to Charles H. Bell, Jr.)
    1. Public comment on all matters pertaining to Agenda Item III, including whether to meet in closed session.
    2. Vote on whether to assert attorney-client privilege and meet in closed session under California Government Code section 54956.9 and Sunshine Ordinance section 67.10(d) to discuss anticipated litigation:  San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code section 1.114.  (Action.)
    3. Conference with Legal Counsel:  Anticipated litigation.  (Discussion.)
      Number of possible cases: 1
    4. If closed session is held, reconvene in open session.
    5. Discussion and vote pursuant to Brown Act section 54957.1 and Sunshine Ordinance section 67.12 on whether to disclose any action taken or discussions held in closed session regarding anticipated litigation.   (Discussion and possible action.)
      Motion:  The Ethics Commission moves (not) to disclose its closed session deliberations re: anticipated litigation.

I suppose we’ll find out more tomorrow…

R.I.P. Moss Room Restaurant – Now Here’s the Outdoorsy, More Casual “Terrace” at the California Academy of Sciences

Thursday, October 16th, 2014

[UPDATE: So I’ve been looking for any kind of support for The San Francisco Chronicle’s objections to Sodexo, but I’m not finding much. Throw in this rewrite from well-trafficked EaterSF of the Chronicle bit linked below and see that the obviously-well-trafficked Chron got a total of four comments on the matter.

And, oh look, The Terrace is now officially approved by District One Supervisor Eric Mar and District Four Supervisor Katy Tang.

And here’s what the place looks like on a foggier day.

And now we’ve also got these posts:

Academy of Sciences opens “The Terrace” cafe for garden dining from The Richmond District Blog

New academy restaurant maintains Bay Area culinary trend by David Boitano, Steinhart Aquarium[!] Examiner

And here’s the new menu of The Terrace

So that’s a wrap on the Academy’s new eatery.]

Or The Terrace, if you prefer, at our California Academy of Sciences

Believe it or not, this is a color photo:

7J7C7783a copy

Oh, this is better:

7J7C7778 copy

Comes now the San Francisco Chronicle’s Paolo Lucchesi to complain about the choice of vendor for this eatery (and BTW, it’s also the new vendor for  Academy Cafe, about which more anon). 

So I don’t know – basically what’s happening is we’re losing the subterranean fine dining Moss Room but gaining the more casual Terrace. I’ll tell you, I was invited to sample the food twice at the Moss Room, both for the first iteration a while back and then for one of the more recent efforts, and I declined because I’m not really competent to judge food, frankly. (But at the time I wondered how the place would do considering its location, which aint good for several reasons…)

Anyway, I don’t get the beef over the new vendor. I assume that everything will work out fine.

Speaking of which, here’s the new menu from the Academy Cafe, which just started up October 1st or so:

7J7C7786a

Now back to the Terrace – here you go, some bites with goat cheese. It was yummy:

7J7C7773 copy

And here’s a salad:

7J7C7775 copy

And here’s what’s in the salad:

7J7C7774 copy

And here’s the pizetta:

7J7C7776 copy

And so on…

Do you see what I mean here? The Terrace isn’t a replacement for the Moss Room – it’s just what came next after the Moss Room didn’t work out. And the basement location of the Moss Room would appear to make a great semi-hidden event space…

(I can recall how upset some people were about getting a new vendor at the nearby Stow Lake Boathouse a few years back. The “local” vendor basically responded to the RPD beauty contest with a real half-assed attitude – he thought he deserved the contract no matter what. I didn’t agree with that either.)

Anyway, if the food writers of the Chronicle want to head out to the Park to see the set-up, I’m sure they’d be welcome to do so…

All the deets:

(more…)

Newly Combative District Four Supervisor Katy Tang Takes Aim at Pro-Tenant Legislation in the Pages of the SF Examiner

Monday, March 3rd, 2014

I say “pages” as I assume that this was printed in yesterday’s SF ‘Xam.

The most interesting observation: We weren’t hanging in the Mission. We were in the Outer Sunset, that foggy Siberia mostly known for extended Asian families living in rows of attached homes built on barren sand dunes.

THERE’S A REASON WHY REAL ESTATE VALUES ARE LOWER IN THE OUTSET, RIGHT? DO YOU WANT TO GET INTO THAT?

Yet the trend behind the toast tweeted around the world started at Trouble Coffee on Judah Street.

NOPE

If trendy cafes are copying Trouble Coffee’s fancy toast, how did the Outer Sunset become a trendsetter? “My office can’t take credit for it,” said Tang, who recently turned 30 and is the youngest member of the Board of Supervisors. “What you see just sprang up and has a life of its own.”

WHETHER THE SUPERVISOR OF THIS AREA IS KATY TANG OR ED JEW, THAT HAS ZERO EFFECT ON WHAT THE OUTER SUNSET IS LIKE, RIGHT. KATY TANG, YOU DON’T “CREATE” ANYTHING, CAPISCHE? SIMILARLY, YOU ARE NOT TO BLAME FOR THE MANY ISSUES THIS AREA HAS – SEE HOW THAT WORKS?

I love that it’s so organic. People have a more independent attitude out here. They don’t like bureaucracy and government intervention. They are free spirits. It might be something about being by the beach.”

KATY TANG IS AGAINST “BUREAUCRACY” AND “GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION,” REALLY?

Westside residents have historically been against growth, but Tang said she’s “hearing a tone of change.” She will discuss her ideas for “responsible development” at the Sunset Recreation Center at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday.

(LOTS OF LUCK WITH THIS ONE, KATY. IT COULD BE A BUMPY RIDE.)

“For so long we made it difficult to grow neighborhoods. Now we just keep going in circles with sensational eviction stories and legislation against property owners,” Tang said. “I feel bad about evictions, but we need balance because more burdens on property owners will only create a backlash. They’ll just throw their hands up and refuse to rent anymore. That’s why we have to create more supply.”

WOW, SOMEBODY FEELS SECURE IN HER JOB!

Tang said she is troubled by City Hall’s volume of reactionary legislation, like last year’s creation of a decadelong ban on converting rentals into condominiums. It was touted as a way to keep tenants in rent-controlled units but had the reverse effect.

SCORECARD PLEASE: “PROGRESSIVE LEGISLATION” = “REACTIONARY LEGISLATION?” REALLY?

There used to be an economic incentive to not evict tenants because a building with a clean eviction history was eligible for the lucrative condo lottery. With that hope now gone, petitions for Ellis Act evictions increased substantially (32 affecting 130 units were filed in the six months leading up to the condo ban compared to 50 for 211 units during the six months after). Predictably, with nothing to lose by an Ellis eviction, property owners are now cashing out to buyers willing to sell units as tenancies-in-common.

I DON’T KNOW WHOSE WORDS THESE ARE – I DON’T THINK THEY’RE OPERATIONAL, IRL. LANDLORDS NOW HAVE “NOTHING TO LOSE BY AN ELLIS ACT EVICTION?” REALLY? I DON’T THINK SO.

“I worry that we’re ignoring the unintended consequences of all the legislation in the pipeline,” Tang said. “Instead of solving our housing problem, we may end up hurting more tenants in the long run.”

CERTAINLY, RENT CONTROL CREATES WINNERS AND LOSERS. KATY TANG, ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF RENT CONTROL? YES? SORT OF? MMMM…

“I never expected to be in elective office,” said Tang, who was appointed to complete her predecessor Carmen Chu’s term and can serve two terms of her own.

KATY TANG WAS APPOINTED TO DO WHATEVER SHE’S TOLD TO DO BY THE PEOPLE WHO GOT TOGETHER TO APPOINT HER, OBVIOUSLY.

“I don’t need to introduce quick-fix legislation five times a week.”

THIS IS A LITTLE, HOW DO YOU SAY, COMBATIVE, HUH?

Introducing the “Front Yard Ambassadors Program” – All Stick, No Carrot – Will It “Transform” the Sunset District?

Wednesday, October 23rd, 2013

Here’s the thing. “Planners” back in the day had no freaking idea how many cars would populate the Sunset District.

They also had no idea how much public transit in the West Bay would degrade over the decades.

So it’s hard to park way out there.

So people improperly pave over their front yards for more “driveway” parking, don’t ask don’t tell.

Thusly:

Anyway, here’s what appointed Supervisor Katy Tang has for Fog Country – it’s the FYAP!

But if you participate, it’ll cost you $245 and you’ll have to listen to what SFGov tells you to do.

This is the kind of thing that will end up pissing off some of the people living out there.

This is a program for the sake of having a program. It will “transform” nothing. And it will not “change” the “pedestrian experience.” Sorry.

But, if you want to try this out, by all means:

“The Front Yard Ambassadors Program gives Sunset District residents the opportunity transform their front yards into vibrant, ecologically friendly and easy to maintain spaces in order to accomplish the following:

  • Change the pedestrian experience and demonstrate neighborhood pride
  • Provide permeable surface to take pressure off our combined sewer system and recharge our underground aquifer
  • Educate the community about what plant species are suited to our microclimate
  • Build relationships with neighbors and encourage the community to work together

Our Partners & Sidewalk Landscaping

Sidewalk landscaping programs exist in several organizations. To learn more about why increasing green space and permeable surfaces is important in San Francisco, visit the websites of our partners in the Front Yard Ambassadors Program below:

Apply to the Front Yard Ambassadors Program

Download the Fact Sheet Here
Download the Fact Sheet in Chinese
View Photos of Sunset District Gardens Here (Coming Soon)
Download the Application Here
Download the Application in Chinese

Questions?
Call our office (415) 554-7460 or email ashley.summers@sfgov.org

Front Yard Ambassadors Program Fact Sheet

How do I apply?
Apply by submitting an application, answers to the supplemental questionnaire and photos of
your front yard. You must ensure that a minimum of five residences on your block also submit
an application to be considered for the program. The application can be found on our website at
www.sfbos.org/tang under the “Front Yard Ambassadors Program” tab.

What is the cost?
Residents chosen for the program will pay a nominal permit fee, depending on how many
residents apply. Permit fees can range from $182 – $245.

How do I get my neighbors to participate?
This is a great time to meet your neighbors! Knock on their door and find out if they are
interested. You must have a minimum of five neighbors on your block to apply.

Who maintains the yard after installation?
Program participants will sign a Letter of Agreement that they will maintain the yard as long as
they reside at their current address. We hope that neighbors will get together for a work day each
year to help each other. Additional support will be provided by Friends of the Urban Forest.

What types of plants and landscaping will be installed?
Once chosen, residents will be able to sit down with professional landscape architects to discuss
their ideas. We have included photos of yards in the Sunset on our webpage for inspiration at
www.sfbos.org/tang. All landscaping will be low maintenance, drought tolerant, and able to live
in our coastal conditions.

Other questions can be directed to our office at (415) 554-7460.

Unemployed and Living in the Sunset Richmond Fogbelt? Affirmative Action for You at the Outside Lands Job Fair!

Friday, July 12th, 2013

What are you living next to way out there in the West Bay? Is it:

1. a halfway house; or

2. a grow house; or

3. a cat house; or

4 a let’s-store-some-illegal-Fourth-of-July-fireworks-here-in-the-basement-just-temporarily-uhoh-KABOOM house?

It’s gotta be something like that.

(I know, man. ‘Cause I used to live on Ninth Avenue in the Inner Fog Belt.)

But now, Fortune favors you! You’re going to get a temporary minimum-wage* gig at the 2013 Outside Lands Music Festival.

It’s affirmative action, baby!

Per appointed District 4 Supervisor and Sunset Native Katy Tang:

“Outside Lands is hosting a Job Fair this Saturday, July 13th at the SF County Fair Building on Ninth and Lincoln. In order to promote local labor opportunities, they are giving special preference to residents of the Richmond and Sunset Districts. Don’t forget your resume!”

What’s that? You don’t live in the West Bay? Well, just use your out-in-the-Avenues friend’s address, right? Then when you get into a position of authoritah, you can use your power to help your friend sneak** in at OL13. Bingo bango!

All the deets:

“The event takes place on Saturday, July 13 at the County Fair Building in Golden Gate Park from 10am until 3pm. The festival is hiring for three types of positions:

*Unless you’re going to be bartending. As IRL, at Outside Lands Bartenders Make More.

**’Cause the days of easily sneaking into the Outside Lands fest are over, baby. The way to do it in 2013 is to have an Inside Man just let you in.

Sorry, Carpet-Bagging Challenger Ivan Seredni, But Katy Tang Will Beat You – Her Six-Second Vine Shows Why

Wednesday, May 29th, 2013

This one.

(I guess you got to click it to make it go, or go here.)

‘Cause if you think “Born and Raised” carries a lot of weight in San Francisco, it’s even more that way way out in the west bay.

Katy Tang is unlikely to make a big mistake before election day because she’s a do-girl who does what she’s told. She learned how to be that way from another District 4 do-girl, who consistently did what she was told.

Hey, are there any other do-girls on the Board of Supervisors? I don’t think so.

But let’s check:

(Recent D5 Supervisor Christina Olague was a do-girl at first, but then she reneged. Now she’s the Former Supervisor Who Shant Be Named. Like Voldemort.)

Of course, ten years is a long time, long enough to grow a backbone I suppose.

Anything’s possible…

Hey SFMTA! Why Not “Complete” Polk Street All the Way to Grove and Eliminate These Parking Spaces in Front of City Hall?

Friday, April 26th, 2013

OMG, would you look at this?

I mean check out all these deadly, beastly automobiles parked on Polk, the very same street that the SFMTA is trying to “complete” don’t you know:

Click to expand

I know, why don’t you take out all these spaces and replace them with a separated bike lane or something, SFMTA?

After all, Transit First, right?

Oh, what’s that? These are the spaces that the Board of Supervisors and their aides park in for free every day so that’s where you just happened to end your campaign of completion?

But don’t you care about safety, SFMTA?

Mmmmm….

“This project seeks to implement aesthetic and safety improvements for all users of Polk Street between McAllister and Union Streets. In accordance with the City’s Transit First policy, improvements will primarily be focused on people who walk, use transit and ride a bicycle along Polk Street. The project is funded by Proposition B General Obligation Bonds and is part of an overall citywide effort to curb pedestrian and bicycle collisions and to provide a safe north-south connection for people on bicycles. Pedestrian and bicyclist collision and injury data on Polk Street point to a corridor in need of safety improvements for all those who share the road. In fact, the southern portion from Sacramento to McAllister Streets is part of the 5% of San Francisco streets that have more than half of the City’s most severe pedestrian collisions.”